More Emails from My Obama Buddies

More Emails from My Obama Buddies

President Barack Hussein Obama’s critics say he has reduced the country to a virtual economic basket case and that he and his re-election team are in process of reducing the presidency of the United States to the level of a carnival side-show with phony come-ons replete with hawking t-shirts and mugs and games of chance.




Well, they may be doing all that but it’s in a good cause–saving the nation from an evil Republican!



I know this because I’m the very proud recipient of personalized emails from various members of the Obama-Biden campaign committee and even some from Barack and Michelle and the vice president! At first, they arrived once or so a week but lately they’ve been filling up my in-box at an amazing rate, clear evidence that my buddies are working really hard.



A cynic might think the email flurry is only designed to raise $$$ for the cash-starved Obama-Biden campaign but I know better. Mostly, they’re intended to demonstrate a friendly effort to keep in touch with their supporters.



What follows are slightly-edited emails I’ve received in the last week, edited because some were very wordy despite how busy, busy, busy Obama and his team are down in D.C. and across the fruited plain. ,



The latest came from the president just today and the poor guy is sounding desperate. He mustn’t have much time to write because he was pretty brief. He asks for $3, of course, to enter his birthday sweepstakes and says, “My upcoming birthday next week could be the last one I celebrate as President of the United States, but that’s not up to me–it’s up to you.”



Yesterday, Juliana Smoot, Deputy Obama-Biden Campaign Manager, said a lot more.



She wrote, ”I’m no good at singing ‘Happy Birthday.’ I hope you’re better, because the President’s inviting two grassroots donors and their guests to celebrate his birthday with him at his home in Chicago on August 12th. Just pitch in $3 or whatever you can to support this campaign, and you’ll be automatically entered for the chance to be there. . . We’ve got a nice spot picked out for the event at the President’s family home in their beautiful South Side neighborhood.”



I thought that was sweet of Juliana but wondered whether the guy who finagled that family home for the Obamas, Tony Rezko, would be there until I remembered Rezko is in prison.



In any event, as always, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=27255.)

Obama's United Nations Is Gutting Our United States

Obama's United Nations Is Gutting Our United States

Bar none–Jimmy Carter, Warren Harding and Millard Fillmore not excluded–Barack Hussein Obama is clearly the worst president in the history of the republic.




Repeatedly exposed as an overachieving fraud, a liar, a Chicago-style thug with established ties to terrorists and other reprobates, none of which ties have been investigated by the mainstream media, Mr. Obama incredibly still expects to win re-election in November.



Just as obvious, it’s evident that our 44th commander in chief has one sincere commitment.



He may have no respect for America’s Constitution, no interest in the future of the United States, and is a proven, gaffe-plagued incompetent but Obama does have a deep and abiding love–an affection not for his lovely wife but for the institution that promises to serve as one of his primary vehicles for accomplishing his ultimate goal of destroying America as we know and love it: the United Nations.



And the slew of socialistic, dictatorial Third World members of the U.N.–the majority membership–are busily, shamelessly working to achieve Obama’s aim.



The United Nations, that last, best hope of mankind has evolved into a power-hungry, anti-Western, anti-American blot on humanity and has long been out of touch with American interests.



The UN now wants to “find resources to finance development needs and address growing global [Third World] challenges, such as combating climate change and is “suggesting various ways to tap resources through international mechanisms, such as coordinated taxes on carbon emissions, air traffic, and financial and currency transactions.”



In other words, just like Obama, the UN wants to tax the bejesus out of those evil rich bastards who create jobs and prosperity to artificially lift third-worlders out of the eighteenth century.



Why bother struggling as Americans did to accomplish what we have when you can legally steal what you need via international taxes on the world’s successful, entreprenurial, capitalist pigs?



And those taxes are just the beginning. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=27086.)

Obama and His Fellow Hypocrites, Masterful Poseurs

Obama and His Fellow Hypocrites, Masterful Poseurs

The following recent news stories have been covered on CNS.com but may or may not have been reported by President Barack Hussein Obama’s mainstream media. Probably not since, after all, they are Obama’s MSM.




1. Bill Clinton’s former pollster Stanley Greenberg commented on the possibility of Gov. Mitt Romney picking Condoleeza Rice for his vice presidential running mate.



Greenberg fulfilled his role as an Obamian poseur by comparing the prospect of a Republican choosing a pro-choice VP candidate to the Democrats choosing a segregationist.



Greenberg’s obvious racial/racist reference to Ms. Rice’s African-American heritage betrayed either his gross historical ignorance or his intentional effort to adhere to the Obama’s campaign’s strategy of distorting realities.



The Republican Party was the party of blacks in America from the time Republican Abe Lincoln freed the slaves up until FDR convinced them his raw deal was in their best interests and it was the GOP that stood up against segregationist Democrats such as KKK Grand Kliegel Robert Byrd and Al Gore’s daddy to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964.



LBJ’s Great Society, which virtually obliterated millions of black family units and rendered more millions of blacks as economic slaves dependent on the government for survival, may have solidified the African-American bloc for Democrats. However, for Greenberg to suggest the Democrat Party is not the Segregation Party is as ludicrous as suggesting Democrats give a damn about the welfare of African-Americans.



2. Clueless and devious White House Press Secretary Jay Carney made the outlandish observation last week that his boss’s 2009 $831 billion economic stimulus package is “widely recognized to have broken the back of the recession.” . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26959.)

When Is a Baby Not a Baby? Never!

When Is a Baby Not a Baby?  Never!

Some newborns emerge from their mother’s womb all scrunched-up, some scratched by forceps or by their own, delicate fingernails, all covered in amniotic goo, most with a cry, a rare few looking as if they were ready, willing, and able to take on the world.




However they make their grand entrance, their moment of birth, all babies have one important feature in common: They have been babies for about 280 days, from the moment of conception, a fact abortionists choose to ignore in the interests of maintaining the illusion that they aren’t baby murderers.



Among many other pro-abort liberals, DNC chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) has said that contending human life begins at conception is “extreme and radical,” an opinion now vividly shown to be extreme and radical, assuming human appearances are not de-facto proof of humanity.



The truth that libs are terminating a human life has been confirmed once again in a BBC first, amazing time-lapse evidence of the development of the human face.



See first ever still pictures and a 43 second video, as well as the first ever MRI footage of twins’ activity in the womb and another of an actual birth at http://tinyurl.com/7658l87.



Notably but not at all surprisingly, the BBC narrator refers only to the face of an “embryo,” not to the visage of a human baby. Too much reality would probably upset the BBC audience if they came to understand abortion doesn’t simply involve the removal of a blob of tissue.



Some blob!



Something else neither the BBC nor the American mainstream media never feature are reports that abortionists, as liberal as they are, often engage in markedly illiberal violent assaults on pro-lifers as sick complements to their violent assaults on the pre-born.



For example, soon after Newsweek and The Daily Beast profiled Personhood USA leaders Keith and Jennifer Mason and a Beast commenter posted . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26887.)

Obama's "Problem" with Romney's Mormon Religion

Obama's "Problem" with Romney's Mormon Religion

The desperate Obama Slime Machine has been getting nowhere with its character assassinations of Mitt Romney, except maybe in the mainstream media.


Attacking Romney’s success at Bain Capital, shamelessly abusing Ann Romney, libelously alleging Romney is a felon, rudely calling him a liar, and falsely accusing him of everything just shy of committing crimes against humanity and nature, all in a vain attempt to deflect public attention from the real issues in this campaign, have failed miserably.

At all costs, the president and his blindly-dedicated slimers don’t want the electorate focusing on the moribund economy, the Fast and Furious debacle, and all the other Barack Hussein Obama’s failures, screw-ups, and gaffes.

Therefore, true to form, more and more of Obama’s faithful acolytes are resorting to suggesting the presumptive Republican candidate’s Mormon faith is a sinister religion and that Romney is unfit for the presidency because of his religious “problem.”

In May, Obama senior advisor David Axelrod dutifully indicated that Romney’s Mormonism would be “off-limits” in the campaign, a lie quickly buttressed by Dem spokesman Ben Labolt who said, “Attacking a candidate’s religion is out of bounds, and our campaign will not engage in it.”

“Off limits” and “out of bounds” apparently were secret code words sent to Obama lackeys instructing them to hammer both Romney and his Christianity.

Democrats, of course, are deeply committed to defending religion as we know from the fact that they have often praised Obama’s 20 year membership in Rev. Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright’s church.

Axelrod’s and Labolt’s sly calls to religious bigotry weren’t necessary anyway. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26859.)

Hot Enough for Ya?

Hot Enough for Ya?

Everyone talks about the hellish hot weather but only liberals know what ‘s causing it: climate change, aka global warming, of course!




The 3,215 record daily high temps set in the month of June and 4,500 new heat records during the last 30 days must incontrovertibly prove Planet Earth is roasting almost to the boiling point.



And, maybe not.



The fact is, those record highs were all set in the U.S. while the rest of the northern hemisphere is just experiencing summertime. It would seem Mother Nature has it in for America since she is wreaking heat havoc only on us.



In almost unprecedented numbers, Mom Nature has caused wildfires, droughts, tornados, and floods, everything but hordes of locusts in the United States–and she has yet to unleash the brunt of her hurricane season!



As Jonathan Overpeck gloated, “This is what global warming looks like at the regional or personal level.”



That professor of geosciences and atmospheric sciences at the University of Arizona breathlessly elaborated, ”The extra heat increases the odds of worse heat waves, droughts, storms and wildfire. This is certainly what I and many other climate scientists have been warning about” and the head honcho of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, Kevin Trenberth, dutifully chimed in by claiming he had predicted the same disasters. (http://tinyurl.com/7by6z7c)



So there, you climate-change-naysaying nitwits!



The chief problem with Overpeck’s, Trenberth’s and all the other “expert” observations that Earthlings are doomed to being toasted, fried, and fricaseed is that they are as wrong in their doomsaying assessments as their fellow phonies who believed a mere few decades ago that we would soon be encased in blocks of ice when global cooling and a new Ice Age enveloped the planet.



Science magazine, Science Digest and a host of other seemingly-reputable publications and scientists were then warning of ”extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation,” shorter growing seasons, cooling oceans and similar catastrophic events.



It never happened, anymore than polar bears starving and stop making baby polar bears, anymore than melting glaciers will end the Alaskan tourist trade, anymore than rising seas will flood our front yards, etc. will come to pass in the near future.



Those apocalyptic visions could be realized down the road as the Earth and our sun do what they’ve been doing for eons but they won’t be the fault of mankind’s activities–unless we assume cave people built filthy, carbon dioxide-spewing, coal-fired power plants we don’t know about and accept the hypothesis that dinosaur farts polluted the atmosphere.



Times, and weather, have changed radically as they always do and ultra-resilient climatologists have shown they can switch sides faster than Chief Justice John Roberts.



Fast forward to the eighties and beyond. Now, due to historically-normal, cyclical climate changes, the fear-mongerers have amazingly converted their baseless freezing scam into a preposterous warming hoax.



Gone are the days when Hollywood cashed in on the orchestrated freezing panic and politicians were elected based on pledges to save their constituents from wearing overcoats in August.



Those days have been supplanted by Tinseltown producing ridiculous movies such as “The Day After Tomorrow” which senselessly theorized that global warming will result in global freezing and Democrat pols warning that North American women had better vote for Obama or be prepared to wear bikinis in January. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26520.)

Latest Email from the Obama-Biden Campaign

Latest Email from the Obama-Biden Campaign

In view of the facts Barack Hussein Obama hypocritically reneged on his pledge to accept public funding of his 2008 campaign after private donations came pouring in by the hundreds of millions and has now lied about being outspent in both that campaign as well as his successful 2004 run to represent Illinois in the United States Senate and, in general, tends to dissemble quite a bit, the following should be taken with a few grains of salt.




There’s no doubt much of the love, adulation, and money has dried up for Obama this time around as his idolators have come to realize his hopey-changey pitch of four years ago was huge on unwanted change but devoid of any real hope and that Mitt Romney has been raking in the cash lately. Still, the following verbatim email from my good buddy, Jim Messina, Campaign Manager for the president’s re-election, could very well be another crock but I thought I would share it anyway.



FROM Jim Messina, BarackObama.com info@barackobama.com 2:44 PM (2 hours ago)



"Romney and the Republicans announced yesterday that they brought in more than $100 million in June.






For context, that’s about what we raised in April and May combined.






We’re still tallying our own numbers, but this means their gap is getting wider, and if it continues at this pace, it could cost us the election.






If everyone who’s been waiting to give pitches in $3 or more today, we can start reversing this trend in just a few hours.






One hundred million is alarming enough, . . ."



(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26528.)

Politics, Presidents, and Polygamy

As I’ve written before, why any sane man would would want to be married to more than woman at the same time is beyond me.




Aside from the fleeting allure of sexual variety, “Sister Wives” notwithstanding, the practice of a man wedding and bedding multiple wives simultaneously strikes me as perverted, as well as extremely stressful on the male’s energies and equanimity.



It’s almost as antithetical to normality as homosexuals engaging in sex with “partners” of the same gender, or marrying them, despite President Barack Hussein Obama’s sudden evolution on the subject of same-sex marriage and even though political correctness now dictates that gay relationships must somehow be considered acceptable “variations” on normality.



Having exhausted most of the Democrat talking points on President Barack Hussein Obama’s agenda to discredit and marginalize Mitt Romney as being out of touch with average Americans because he and his father made a success of their lives, Obama’s faithful have lately been calling Romney’s Mormon religion into question.



In America, religion is supposed to be off limits in elections but liberals, who don’t much respect religion to start with, don’t respect any limits when those limits are at variance with their extremist philosophy.



Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the other 14 Mormons in Congress–13 of whom are Republicans–are generally exempted from such criticism but none of those senators and congressmen are running for the presidency of the United States.



Not surprisingly, liberal aversion to the possibility of electing a Mormon to the presidency has been spiking.



That reality isn’t surprising since libs are anything but liberal when it comes to anyone or anything seen as illiberal and Latter-Day Saints are strongly opposed to the liberal sacrosanct sacrament of abortion, to the practice of homosexuality, and to the legalization of same-sex marriages, among other cherished liberal rights.



According to an analysis conducted by American National Election Studies, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=22135.)

A Day in the Life of the Drudge Report

A Day in the Life of the Drudge Report

(Non-disclaimer: I have no affiliation and have never had any contact with anyone associated with the Drudge Report–and I damned well haven’t been paid for what follows.)




Matt Drudge began the internet Drudge Report in 1996 and over the ensuing sixteen years has published both original articles and news items from a wide variety of sources, mostly stories which the MSM either ignores or downplays because, well, because they’re the mainstream media.



Drudge first gained widespread notoriety in 1998 by going where Newsweek and other mainstreamers dared not go, publicizing the sleazy details of the Monica Lewinsky–Bill Clinton sexcapades in the White House. Since then, Drudge has posted links to hundreds of stories that rattle liberal cages almost as much as Rush Limbaugh does.



Today, many conservatives regularly visit the Drudge Report to keep up on the news the public is not supposed to know about, information considered by the MSM as damaging to their liberal darlings, and some off-the-wall pieces rivaling The Onion, the difference being they are real.



Liberals probably drop by as often, although they’d never admit it, in order to check out the lies they’ve been caught in and news they had hoped would never be reported.



For those unfamiliar with what the Drudge Report reports, a brief sampling from late Saturday, June 9, 2012:



“Obama girl won’t endorse Obama.”



Amber Lee Ettinger, who strutted her stuff for candidate Obama in 2008, won’t even say if she will support or vote for President Barack Hussein Obama in 2012. See the story and Ms. Ettinger strut and sing her faded idolatry here: http://tinyurl.com/7fs4bdx.



Apparently, even idols tend to lose their luster after they lose their credibility.


(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=25352.)

"Saturday Night Live": Obama's Bootlicker

"Saturday Night Live": Obama's Bootlicker

Question: What’s the difference between members of the Democrat National Committee and the cast of “Saturday Night Live?”




Answer: Not much, except that the people on the DNC get paid a lot less than the comedians on ”SNL.”



I used to enjoy watching ”Saturday Night Live.” I mostly liked the bride’s eye-rolling and feigned shock at some of the sketches.



When it debuted on NBC in 1975 featuring ”not ready for prime time players” such as John Belushi, Jane Curtin, Chevy Chase, Gilda Radner, et al., the show was usually funny if occasionally off-color and edgey. ”SNL” was always politically correct back then yet it poked caustic fun in almost every direction.



No more. The show has repeatedly demonstrated it has the same goals as the DNC, re-electing President Barack Hussein Obama. It simply employs one-sided, partisan humor to advance that aim as opposed to directly funding Democrats.



Times and “SNL” have radically changed, especially since the appearance on the political scene of Barack Hussein Obama.



Aside from regularly ridiculing the presumptive GOP nominee for president, Mitt Romney, just as their cadre of late night comedians like Letterman, Leno, Fallon, Stewart, et al. incessantly do, “SNL” has now apparently upped the ante by allowing Obama and Company to censor its content.



In deference to complaints by arch-racial agitator Rev. Jesse Jackson and in conformity with a concerted effort to compensate for alleged discrimination toward African-Americans in the entertainment industry, Hollywood and television producers caved and today blacks are more than well-represented on the silver and TV screens.



They bent over backwards, upside-down and every whichway to assure blacks that the entertainment industry was not only not racist but that they would slander conservatives in the process in order to prove their how liberal they were.



DailyCaller.com revealed that “SNL” has caved again, this time to advance the Obama 2012 re-election campaign.



Last Saturday, Lorne Michael scrapped the show’s planned and written opening skit mocking the president’s shameless efforts to suggest he was primarily responsible for killing mastermind 9/11 terrorist Osama bin Laden last May in Pakistan.



In Obama’s historical revisioning, SEAL Team 6, then-CIA director Leon Panetta, Admiral William McRaven, and a host of other advisors became secondary to his incredible courage in ordering the assault on bin Laden’s Abbotabad compound–after months of indecision.



Truth is usually less humorous than fantasy so “SNL” opted to . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=23331.)

The OWS and the Sin of Presumption

The OWS and the Sin of Presumption

At one time or another, most of us assume and presume too much but few of us ever envision the United States of America collapsing as a great nation. Historically, such a presumption was not uncommon.




The thought of ancient Rome being overrun by barbarians had to have been unfathomable to the average Roman in the street, until it happened.



The idea that Russians would be ruled by Lenin and his Bolsheviks after Czar Nicholas II must have seemed beyond the pale of believability, until it happened.



Most Germans were unaware that Adolph Hitler would initiate one of the most brutal genocides in human history and precipitate a world war leading to Germany’s near-extinction, until it happened.



And, thanks in large part to the complicity of the mainstream media which prefer to liberally slant news and ignore what is the most dire threat to America’s existence since Hitler and the USSR, the presumption that we will survive the insidious Occupy Wall Street movement aimed at undermining the capitalist foundations of our prosperity and success, could very well come to fruition in the not too distant future.



The mortal sin of presumption is a Roman Catholic doctrine which essentially holds that to arrogantly believe and trust in one’s own merits to the exclusion of any divine intercession can lead to salvation is the road to perdition.



Whether or not Americans accept that religious teaching, vainly presuming the United States will exist indefinitely, that we as a country are immune to forces which can effect our dissolution, that we are impervious to external and internal threats, is not only presumptuous but reflects a dangerous ignorance of the history of all great nations and empires.



Those nations and empires have had an average life-span of two centuries. As of 2012, the U.S.A. will be 223 years old.



The reality of presumption, that Americans and America will continue to regard the OWS, the Occupiers of Wall Street and everything else they choose to occupy, destroy, and desecrate as just another protest group, is beyond foolhardy. In fact, they are busily plotting the overthrow of government and institutions which have served us, never perfectly, but satisfactorily, for centuries.



An extreme scenario? Please read on. . .




(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=23194.)

Susan Sarandon Blacklisted!

Susan Sarandon Blacklisted!

You would think that with his past, sleazey connections President Barack Hussein Obama would be ultra-tolerant of fellow leftists-liberals-radicals but that’s not always the case, especially when they become an embarrassment in an election year.




It was perfectly acceptable in 2008 for Obama to be bosom buddies with revolutionists William Ayers, Bernadette Dohrn, Jeremiah Wright, and other professed anti-Americans. Most voters knew about those illicit associations–or should have known– yet they elected Obama anyway.



When Obama appointed to high offices such reprobates and revolutionaries such as Harold Koh, Kevin Jennings, John Holdren, Van Jones, Dawn Johnson, Mark Lloyd, Chai Feldblum, and a slew of other sick fruitcakes, it seemed obvious that our president didn’t give a damn what Americans thought of his extremist background or of his far out nominees and his supporters didn’t seem to give a damn, either.



That view now turns out to be incorrect. Obama is in fact occasionally selective as to who is awarded the Obama imprimatur and who is consigned to executive oblivion. Apparently, the aging actress and radical poster “girl,” Susan Sarandon is now on the Anointed One’s S-list.



Denied a White House security clearance, Sarandon also claims her telephone has been tapped and that the government maintains a dossier on her. It all sounds like paranoia except that her whining might have a basis in fact. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=22341.)

IOTW News You Won't See in the MSM

IOTW News You Won't See in the MSM

President Barack Hussein Obama’s mainstream media’s stranglehold on news it decrees as newsworthy, i.e. news that meshes with the leftist political agenda, is the stuff of contemporary legend. Following the lead of the former “paper of record,” the New York Times, the MSM prints and broadcasts only news that fits.

It remains then for non-mainstream outlets to pick up the slack and disseminate to the public information the MSM censors and buries in liberal socio-political interests.

To be sure, sometimes stories become so public thanks to those rebel outlets that the MSM is compelled to cover them, albeit with a leftist twist if they can get away with it.

Two momentous, and salacious, cases in recent memory which the mainstreamers attempted desperately to conceal, one of which almost brought down a Democrat presidency, another which exposed a Dem darling as a lying adulterer, proved to be major embarrassments to the MSM not because of their smarminess but because they knew about them and failed to report them.

It took the upstart, Matt Drudge, to out the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky outrages and the tabloid rag, the National Enquirer, to reveal the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter affair.

Of course, as always and with a little help from their political friends, the MSM recovered from its abdication of journalistic integrity.

A distinctly unfriendly website, unfriendly to the Left, IOwntheWorld.com, regularly publishes stories and items of interest that even Drudge.com avoids, reports in the news which the MSM wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot keyboard.

Irreverent, iconoclastic, occasionally bawdy, IOTW provides an alternative to Drudge’s wannabe mainstream pretensions and to other websites that filter the news, as well as reporting known truths with an honest spin.

IOTW also puts the lie to the widely-held misconception that conservatives are conservative in everything, but that’s a whole different perspective that can best be understood by visiting IowntheWorld.com.

A sampling of IOTW reports:

(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=9906.)

DADT Repeal Consequence: Now Pvt. Benjamin Can Make Love to Mr. Ed!

DADT Repeal Consequence: Now Pvt. Benjamin Can Make Love to Mr. Ed!

Yet another installment from the You Can’t Make This Stuff Up Department: Sgt. Bilko may soon marry Pvt. Gomer Pyle and they may have a threesome with Arnold, the “Green Acres” pig or with Mr. Ed!

The Internet is notorious for publishing and publicizing lies, innuendo, fabrications, in a word, trash, okay, two words, trash and crap. It’s therefore incumbent on a serious blogger to verify outrageous stories before commenting on them and spreading the news.

One such story demanded more verification than usual since it involved an allegation that was so far beyond the pale of belief it bordered on the absurdly incomprehensible. As it turns out, very regrettably, the report is no longer an allegation but fact: The United States Senate has voted to approve the practice of bestiality in the military.

That is not a misprint.

Should the House of Representatives concur with the Senate and President Barack Hussein Obama sign the bill, men and women in Amrica’s armed forces will be free to engage in sexual relations with dogs, cats, chickens, horses, or with any other animal without fear of retribution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The repercussions of the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law governing homosexual conduct in the military advocated by the president and endorsed by liberals everywhere have now come home to roost.

Before critics of that contention protest it as an unfair attack on gays, consider the timeline of the proposed legislation . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=8633.)

Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī

Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī

You may say Khadafy or Kadaffie and I may say Qadafi or Gadaffie but “Daffy” is definitely not an acceptable or applicable nickname for Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi, in Arabic مُعَمَّر القَذَّافِي‎ Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī, the Libyan despot, butcher of Libyans, mad dog of the Mideast, murderer of untold numbers of defenseless Americans and Europeans.

Mu, as I will refer to him since I refuse to pay him any respect by repetitively typing Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī is or was anything but daffy. Treacherous, vile, and peculiar yes, but daffy, no; he is or was as wily as a snake, as calculating as Barack Obama. Those alternative present and past tense verbs are necessitated by the fact no one knows as of the time of this writing whether he is alive or if he has already been killed like Obama killed another Muslim terrorist, Usama bin laden.

The only certainty right now, should Mu be in the welcoming arms of Allah, is that Obama with the assistance of Seal Team Six didn’t get him and it’s improbable that he screamed the Islamic war cry, “Alahu akbar!” before Libyan rebels chopped him up for dog food.

Arabs don’t especially like dogs.

It’s doubtful, too, that Mu will get his 72–or 50 virgins in paradise, depending on who’s counting–after he passes to the Great Islamic Beyond because Allah generally reserves that select group of toothless hags for true Muslim heroes and Mu is/was anything but heroic. Killing Christians and other infidels is one thing to Allah. Killing his fellow Muslims which Mu did with a bloody vengeance is quite another in the Islamic playbook.

Whatever Mu’s ultimate fate, a safe bet is that America’s current president will attempt to claim at least a degree of . . .
(Read more at . . . http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5262)

Dem-Libs Behaving Badly: Sweeney, Susman, Et al

Dem-Libs Behaving Badly: Sweeney, Susman, Et al

In Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America, Ann Coulter draws direct parallels between the French revolutionists of the eighteenth century and twenty-first century American liberals. Our libs engage in comparable destruction, mindlessness, and disrespect for order and civility as did French mobs over 200 years ago.

We witnessed a prime example of such liberal behavior in Madison, Wisconsin when unionistas like the SEIU caused massive damage to the Capitol building to pressure Republican Governor Scott Walker into backtracking on his commitment to restore sanity to the Badger State’s finances. We saw it in the strong-arm tactics used to suppress legal town hall protests against Obamacare. It regularly occurs in vicious commentaries by the likes of MSNBC’s Ed Schultz.

(See previous posts on those behavioral gems.)

Those instances, however, pale in comparison to “official” Democrat liberal exhibitions of grossly disrespectful incivility and vile partisan insults. Dem-libs in positions of authority don’t usually tear up buildings or beat up lawful protestors or openly wish conservatives would kill themselves. They let their flunkies handle that end of the abuse spectrum but are very adept at a variety of other abuses.

American “progressives” from state houses to the State Department recently showed their true colors. Cases in point on the state level are New Jersey’s Democrat Senate President Stephen Sweeney and on an international level Ambassador to Great Britain Louis B. Susman.

Sen. Sweeney is disenchanted and upset with Jersey’s conservative Republican Governor Chris Christie over Christie’s perceived slights and state budget cuts, additions, and line item vetoes. Sweeney expressed his disenchantment and upsetment in no uncertain terms, including calling the governor a “bully and a punk,” adding, ”I wanted to punch him in his head.”

Not content with that nastiness and threat of violence, Sweeney drew upon his enviable grasp of popular culture and filmdom by comparing Christie to a well-known villain: “You know who he reminds me of? Mr. Potter from ‘It’s a Wonderful Life,’ the mean old bastard who screws everybody.” He later reiterated his vulgarity by calling the governor “a rotten bastard” and “a prick.”

Classy, Stephen, classy!

See videos and the slanted report on NJ.com which fails to mention the New Jersey fiscal abyss caused by Sweeney and his Democrats and with something less than objectivity observes, “The Republican Bobbleheads will side with the governor again, and the vetoes will stand,” here: http://bit.ly/md8qVu

The good news is that neither Sweeney nor NJ.com have yet proposed murdering Gov. Christie in his bathtub ala Jean-Paul Marat or trotting out the guillotine.

They never employed the guillotine in Great Britain although Brits did favor the oubliette but some people there might like to see one or both used, figuratively, of course, in the case of Ambassador Louis B. Susman. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4964)

Red Poppies and Memorial Day 2011

Red Poppies and Memorial Day 2011

I gave my two granddaughters, aged 11 and 13, little, red, paper poppies the other day.

They looked at them skeptically and asked, “What’s this?” I briefly tried to explain their meaning, that red poppies are worn on Memorial Day to commemorate America’s war dead, the hundreds of thousands of men and women who have died for our country. The girls shrugged and pocketed the poppies.

Assuming their public school teachers would at least make passing reference to the meaning of this national holiday and maybe even of the poppies, I asked them today what their teachers had said about Memorial Day. The eleven year old answered, “Nothing,” the thirteen year old answered, “A few told us to enjoy the day off, one told us to stay safe.” I asked if they had worn the poppies. Both said no, that they would have felt “weird.”

Very sad, indeed, on a number of counts including the fact Memorial Day is not intended for enjoyment but for remembering.

It’s easy to forget the meanings behind national holidays, especially when those charged with educating either don’t know the meanings or don’t care. Christmas, of course, is now regarded in our schools as nothing more than an occasion for a week off and in American society in general as a time for shopping and getting.

And people often confuse Veterans Day, when we honor all those who have served the nation, with Memorial Day, when we pay respects to those who have perished in the service of our country so, to be generous, maybe we can attribute the prevailing disinterest . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4670)

America's Enemy Within

America's Enemy Within

Precisely who originated the term “the enemy within” is unclear. It has now become fairly commonplace in our vernacular and has been referred to in a religious context, as partial titles of some books such as Michael Savage’s, even used as a title episode in “Star Trek.”

With reference to America’s internal, domestic enemies, “the enemy within” is at once a very simple and complex term which has in the past referred to the Communist menace but has evolved of late to mean the religion of Islam or, to be PC, radical Islamic elements.

America has any number of enemies, both outside our borders and within, nations, people, and forces who despise us for one reason or other and who passively or actively work to undermine our values, national security, our very existence as a nation.

Communism is not quite dead since it lives and breathes in China, North Korea, and Cuba and a former KGB head Vladimir Putin rules the former U.S.S.R. with figurehead, Dmitry Medvedev. However, despite the natural inclinations of Communist despots to bluster threateningly, the Red Menace can’t be considered a viable threat.

As of now.

Far and away the most visible and serious external enemy America has today, as well as our most dedicated and dangerous enemy within, is extreme, radical Islam which is probably the most insidious domestic collection of foes we have ever encountered.

They are not traitors in the sense of France’s Vichy government . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1803)

The Prime Players in the Shirley Sherrod Affair

The Prime Players in the Shirley Sherrod Affair

Okay, I thought USDA official Shirley Sherrod proved herself a typical racist, black bigot based on that 20 second snippet of video tape that originally went viral. After all, she did say, “I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land–so I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough.”

A lot of other people thought the same including conservative publisher-commentator Andrew Breitbart, Tom Vilsack, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Benjamin Todd Jealous, CEO of the NAACP, and, most disturbingly, Barack Obama, president of the United States.

Since the truth came out on Tuesday, almost everyone has been falling all over themselves in a rush to issue apologies after their rush to judgment.

The principal actors in the Shirley Sherrod affair, none of whom is squeaky clean in this mess: . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1800)

When Stanley Met Barry, Part Two

When Stanley Met Barry, Part Two

Part One of this very mini miniseries dealt with the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, America’s head honcho in the Afghanistan War, and the contention that his and his aides’ remarks in a Rolling Stone article reflected immaturity and poor judgement.

Okay. . . a general 8 years Obama’s senior on the field of battle made immature comments that reflected poor judgement on a president whose chief pre-political experience was serving as a neighborhood organizer on the Chicago front.

Whatevah!

But the general was summoned to an audience with the president, a meeting that promised to be a dressing down for his impertinence, a summons from the boss he could not ignore.

We are privileged to be the only source privy to the stream of consciousness thoughts of General McChrystal as he winged the miles from Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan to Obama’s air base in D.C.

We are also privy, via sources that cannot be revealed, to the dialogue between McChrystal and Obama in the White House on Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010.

WARNING: Some of what follows is not suitable for the eyes or ears of children. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1753)